Some are making absurd comments about the law, 2nd degree murder includes "intent." Gecko, where did you get your law degree?2nd degree murder, EXCLUDES INTENT. NOBODY is suggesting that he set out to kill anybody. What 2nd degree murder says: non-premeditated killing, resulting from an assault in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility. Second degree murder is different from First Degree Murder which is a premeditated, intentional killing"

One can reasonably assume, if you are chasing a person with a loaded gun, one might get harmed or killed. The evidence suggest George was chasing him. He was in his car when the 911 call was made. The incident happeded 3 buildings over. He got out of his car in persuit of a "suspect" that "looks like he is on drugs or something"

In Florida and many states (most states) if you drink and drive and KILL someone, it is charged as 2nd degree murder. You didn't set out or have the intent to kill anyone, but your behavior resulted in a death.

"but he DOES have the right to kill someone who was bashing his head on the ground." Not if he was the aggressor.

There is still no evidence of a broken nose. His "head gash" is not in evidence.

In Florida, if you are the aggressor, I have every right to stand my ground, and bash your head into the street. You don't have the right to kill me.

He was in his CAR during the 911 call. At some point he decided to leave his car with a loaded gun and "follow", "chase" or "whatever" KNOWING that somebody might DIE, as a result. He took the gun, mostly to detain the youth. That is not what happened.In Florida, one cannot use a gun as a "scare tatic" in order to assist the police, unless they are Standing their Ground. He had no Ground to Stand.

correct, the 911 tape indicates he was on foot pursuit after being told not to do it. He is winded, saying that he his "fvicking sick of the koons getting away with it."

He should have reported and waited for the police, as instructed. Yet, his personality got the better of him. He went balls to the walls and was going to be the neighboorhood hero. It turned out different.

To be accurate - 2nd degree murder as described requires "intent." However, it is not specific intent. Instead, it is referred to as "transfered intent." If your intent is to commit an assault, and a death results, the intent is transferred to second degree murder.

Transferred intent can apply to victims as well. You try to shoot one, but hit another. Many states have felony murder statutes. You intend to commit a felony and a death results. The intent is transferred and it is felony murder.

---> That is such an asinine comment because you don't have a law degree either.

2nd degree murder, EXCLUDES INTENT.

---> No...it doesn't. Murder was defined as killing another human being with "malice aforethought". Malice aforethought is a legal term of art, that encompasses the following types of murder:

- "Intent-to-kill murder"

- "Grievous-bodily-harm murder" - Killing someone in an attack intended to cause them grievous bodiliy harm. For example, if a person fatally stabbed someone, even if she only intended to wound her victim, she could still be executed.

- "Felony-murder" - Killing someone while in the process of committing a felony. Note that at common law, there were few felonies, and all carried the death penalty. For example, at common law, robbery was a felony. So if a robber accidentally killed someone during a robbery, the robber could be executed.

- "Depraved heart murder" - Killing someone in a way that demonstrates a callous disregard for the value of human life. For example, if a person intentionally fires a gun into a crowded room, and someone dies, the person could be convicted of depraved heart murder.

---> Now comes 'manslaughter' and why you're...confused. To start with, the difference between murder and manslaughter is "malice aforethought"...it's present in murder, but NOT in manslaughter. Then there are two distinct types...voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter consists of an intentional killing that is accompanied by additional circumstances that mitigate, but do not excuse, the killing. Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of another human being without intent and it's broken down into two types: 1) criminal-negligence manslaughter; and 2) unlawful-act manslaughter. Criminal-negligence manslaughter is when death results from a high degree of negligence or recklessness.

One can reasonably assume, if you are chasing a person with a loaded gun, one might get harmed or killed.

---> 1) Zimmerman wasn't 'chasing' Martin, he was following him...there IS a difference. 2) And you could make that same assumption WITHOUT carrying a weapon.

In Florida and many states (most states) if you drink and drive and KILL someone, it is charged as 2nd degree murder. You didn't set out or have the intent to kill anyone, but your behavior resulted in a death.

---> You might want to check that again because while Florida Statute §782.071 clearly defines Vehicular Homicide as a 2nd degree felony charge, it still falls under Manslaughter because Murder requires "malice aforethought". Which is not to say that a Vehicular Homicide couldn't be charged as Murder...it's entirely possible to get drunk and see your ex with his/her new squeeze and run them over.

---> As for "many states (most states)"...I also checked the statutes of several other states and vehicular homicide is Manslaughter...NOT Murder. If you want, I would be more than happy to provide you with them.

Why is this so hard to understand?

---> It's not, but then again...I obviously have a greater understanding of the nuances of differences than you do.

--------------------If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!

Is there a reason why you are going through a 2 page explanation, WITHOUT a law degree, when the resident LAWYER has ALREADY defined what needs to be defined?

Seems a colossal waste of time, particularly since you had to SPECIFICALLY choose cp's reply to quote back to, when Maury's answer is RIGHT THERE.

I might not personally like Maury? But as the resident lawyer who DOES participate in these threads, you would THINK other posters would just be like "oh yeah, he's a LAWYER.. HE KNOWS THE ANSWER" and just shut the fvck up once he spoke and GAVE THE ANSWER.